Dear Members of
the List:
Assalamu-Alaikum,
I am forwarding to you from Message International
(http://www.messageonline.org/2004febmarch/cover2_opt.pdf)
an
article on “the Feminist Debate Over Hijab” by Ms. Anne Sofie for your
information and use.
Ms. Anne Sofie clarifies the misunderstanding of some modern Muslim
feminists in an academic style.
Yours sincerely,
Shah Abdul Hannan
the
Feminist Debate
over hijab
www.MessageOnline.org
February - March ‘04 •
13
WWithin
the Muslim Ummah, there is extensive discussion
about the veil, and Muslim feminists have launched a
variety of attacks against the practice of veiling. Some
such as Mai Yamani and Maha Azzam discuss it in an academic context
from the perspective of social researchers describing Muslim
social realities. Others such as Fatima Mernissi and Nawal EI
Sadaawi
criticize it in the context of social, political or religious activism.
The
debate is hard to follow largely due to the lack of any clear
definition
of whether a veil is understood as a head-cover or face-veil. In
order
to better understand the discussion, I will give the Qur'anic terms
to
which participants in the debate about the veil refer.
First, there is the term khimar (24:30-31), which might be
translated
as 'shawl'. In the traditional Qur'anic commentaries, it is
explained
that women used to wear a big shawl, which covered the head and
hung down the back (al-Tabari 1994). Second, there is the term
jilbab
(33:59), which can be translated as 'outer garment'. Both of these
terms are used in a context of women in general, whereas the
Qur'anic
passage where the term hijab is stated (33:53) deals with how men
should behave towards the wives of the Prophet, and the verse states
that men should stay behind a hijab (curtain) while talking to them.
Moreover, the Qur'an, also, gives directions on how the wives of the
Prophet have different obligations and rights from other women
(33:30-33), a special status. In the Islamic discussion, one main
conflict
has arisen: does this mean that the injunctions given to the
Prophet's wives were directed only to them, or should all female
Muslims be expected to follow the example of the wives of the
Prophet? Divergences over women's issues in the various Islamic
approaches arise out of this particular dilemma.
Nawal EI Sadaawi and Fatima Mernissi both oppose the use of the
veil. El Sadaawi, in her many lectures in Scandinavia, particularly
at
the end of the 1980s, used the idea of 'veiling the brain'. Building
on a simple fieldwork methodology, her main argument was drawn
from an account of a young relative who had been intelligent and
brave until she put on the veil. After that, according to EI
Sadaawi,
it was impossible to conduct a normal discussion with her. This
story was presented as evidence of how veiling not only comes to
mean covering the hair, but also 'veiling the brain'. Fatima
Mernissi,
who has taken a more scientific approach to the study of veiling,
attacks the use of the veil, claiming that there is no Qur'anic
evidence
that the wearing of a veil is an Islamic obligation (Mernissi
1987:85-101). Leila Ahmad, in her book, Women and Gender in
Islam, argues that veiling for women was a requirement only for the
wives of the Prophet (Ahmad 1992:55).
Much research dealing with Islamic veiling tends to analyze it in
socio-political terms (Zuhur 1992; Broch-Due and Rudie and Bleie
1993; El-Solh and Mabro 1994; Gocek and Balaghi 1994). Mai
Yemeni, a Muslim feminist and a researcher on women in Islam,
states, "the hijab is central to this Islamist movement. In
general,
women who choose to wear it are aware of its social and economic
advantages. These range from more possibilities for getting married
(since men 'prefer' muhajjabat) to economic practicalities (low-cost
dress)." (Yamani 1996:11) Haleh Afshar, a researcher on Iranian
women, also sees the veil in socio-political terms. She claims that
Islamist women are particularly defensive of the veil and have
chosen
it as the symbol of Islamization. She continues, "for them the
veil is liberating, and not an oppressive force. They maintain that
the veil enables them to become the observers and not the observed;
that it liberates them from the dictates of the fashion industry and
the demands of the beauty myth. In the context of the patriarchal
structures that shape women's lives, the veil is a means of
bypassing
sexual harassment and 'gaining respect'." (Afshar in Yamani
1996:201)
This instrumentalist interpretation of the phenomenon of Islamic
veiling has its base in the nature of in-group/out-group
communication.
I believe that when Islamist women meet non-lslamist or
even non-Muslim women, their discussions are governed by what
they perceive are the 'premises of the other'. For example, in
discussions
with a researcher, Islamist women might try to convince
the researcher of the benefits of veiling on rational, apologetic
grounds. Thus, socio-political arguments are used, whereas in other
contexts with different people, other arguments might be used. This
becomes apparent in Maha Azzam's article that is part of the
anthology
Feminism and Islam edited by Yamani. Azzam, who is also of
Muslim origin, breaks with the practice of offering socio-political
explanations of veiling. She records that "when women are asked
why they wear the hijab, they frequently respond by simply saying
that they are merely complying with a Qur'anic injunction."
(Azzam in Yamani 1996:224)
In order to understand why the same person can give different
answers to the same question from different people, it is necessary
to appreciate that a phenomenon might lend itself to various levels
of explanation. On one level there is the person's drive, something
that can be hard to assess. On the second level, there is the
person's
motivation, which in this particular case might be to follow a
Qur'anic injunction. On the third level, there are the apologies,
i.e.
the various arguments a person offers to explain a practice. These
arguments might vary according to the person with whom the
speaker is talking.
Azzam explores the Qur'an, looking for texts on veiling. She quotes
verses 33:59 and 33:32-33, stating that these verses are directed to
the wives of the Prophet. Although she is correct in regard to verse
33:32-33, it should be noted that she has overlooked the fact that
verse 33:59 is, also, directed to women believers in general.
Moreover, Azzam, also, quotes verses 24:30-31, which contain the
term khimar. Despite the fact that these are the verses most
Islamists
would refer to in matters of veiling, Azzam does not mention the
part dealing with covering; she interprets these verses in terms of
their reference to proper Islamic modesty which requires both men
and women to lower their eyes. Azzam's selectivity indicates her
intention to render Islam compatible with a Western world-view
and her interpretations are in line with a Western notion of gender
equality. Although she explicitly states that there is a religious
implication
in women's veiling, she sees the political symbolization of
hijab as too powerful to overlook (Azzam in Yamani 1996: 226).
However, Azzam, in contrast to other Muslim feminist writers,
weaves together the two themes, the religious and the political, in
the debate on women's veiling.
Muslim feminists tend to reject the suggestion that the use of the
veil is Islamic, claiming instead that it is an ancient tradition
that
has crept into the present understanding of Islam. Also, as I
mentioned
above, they and others involved in the debate fail to define
clearly what comprises a veil; this causes confusion, especially
with
regard to the interpretation of Qur'anic verses. It is important to
2
14
•
February - March ‘04
the
MESSAGE
international
bear
these issues in mind when giving an account of the different
points of view.
Fatima Mernissi, who might be regarded as the most prominent of
the Muslim feminists or at least the most widely read in a western
context, devotes a whole chapter, entitled "The Hijab, the
Veil", in
her book, Women and Islam, to a discussion of the veil. It should
be noted that Mernissi does not discuss the concept of hijab from a
contemporary perspective, but from the perspective of the Qur'an;
in doing so, she fails to acknowledge that the term hijab has
acquired a variety of meanings. Her choice of this term might be
explained by the fact that today it is often used to denote the
female
head-cover. Nevertheless, in the Qur'anic usage, it refers not to
female clothing, but to the curtain that was ordered to be set up
between the Prophet's wives and men in Medina. It might be that
Mernissi is aware of this and wants to draw attention to the issue
of
segregation between men and women, the Muslim construction of
a female versus a male world that might be seen as a consequence of
the verse on hijab. If she wanted to use a word synonymous with
'veil', the Qur'anic term khimar is the more specific term used to
denote a covering cloth worn by women. Mernissi desire to portray
hijab as pertaining specifically to the Prophet's wives is indicated
by
her reference to verse 33:59 in which the term jilbab is used; here
she twists the meaning in such a way that readers without sufficient
knowledge of the text might be misled. She says that verse 33:59 is
the verse "in which He [God] advised the wives of the Prophet
to
make themselves recognized by pulling their jilbab over
themselves."
(Mernissi 1987:180 - my italics) While this is not entirely
inaccurate, since the verse is partially directed to the wives of
the
Prophet, Mernissi does not give the full meaning; the verse actually
also includes the women of the believers (33:59).
There are two possible explanations for this. Either Mernissi has
misunderstood (or chosen to misunderstand) the terminology of the
debate, or she has decided to disregard the Qur'anic verse about
khimar,
in order to focus only on the concept of 'segregation' (i.e.
hijab). In either case, her discussion is marked by a lack of
specific
terminology with regard to female veiling and a certain selectivity
in
regard to the source material. By interpreting hijab as 'the veil',
she
uses the word as it is sometimes used in contemporary debate, but
by confining her discussion only to the Qur'anic verse which
mentions
the term hijab she limits the issue to the veiling or segregation
of the wives of the Prophet. I see this as a Muslim feminist
strategy
to associate covering exclusively with the wives of the Prophet, as
was seen in Azzam's text above.
In Azzam's article, she actually quotes verses about female covering
while simultaneously claiming that these verses are directed to the
wives of the Prophet only, thus contradicting one of the verses she
quotes. By arguing that covering applies only to the wives of the
Prophet, Muslim feminists attempt to neutralize the claims of
Islamists and of traditional Islamic jurisprudence that covering is
an
Islamic injunction. Mernissi's discussion on veiling is a prominent
example of how the arguments of feminists, similarly to those of
Islamists, "reproduce the past in the present." However, the
differences
in outlook make the two factions arrive at different conclusions,
and the feminist approach and feminists tend to overlook or
ignore relevant Qur'anic statements. This selectivity seems to be
dictated by an attempt to introduce new legislation based on
disregarding
certain passages of the text.
The confusion of concepts in the discussion about Islamic veiling is
a problem, which has created misunderstandings that limits the
discussion
on various levels. At least among Western-educated
researchers, there is a failure to distinguish between the
face-veil,
which covers either the whole face or parts of it, and the
headscarf,
which covers the hair but leaves the face uncovered. The Muslim
feminist debate is marked by selectivity, and it seems that they
tend
to select those texts that are suitable to their purposes, precisely
the
same thing they have accused male scholars of doing historically and
in contemporary times.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Ahmad,
Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam, New Haven and
London: Yale University Press.
Broch-Due, V. Rudie, I. and Bleie, T. (eds) 1993. Carved Flesh/Cast
Selves: Gendered Symbols and Social Practices. Oxford: Berg
Publisher.
El-Solh, C.F. and Mabro, J. (eds.) 1994. Muslim Women's Choices.
London: Berg Publisher.
Göçek, F. M. and Balaghi, S. (eds) 1994. Reconstructing gender in
the Middle East. New York: Columbia University Press.
Memissi, Fatima. 1987. Women and Islam. A Historical and
Theological Enquiry. Oxford: Blackwell.
Roald, Anne Sofie. 2001. Women in Islam. The Western
Experience. London: Routledge.
al-Tabari, Abu Ja'far Muhammad Ibn Jarir. 1994. Tafsir al-Tabari.
Beirut: al-Mu'assassa al-risala.
Yamani, Mai. 1996. Feminism and Islam. London: Ithaqa Press.
Zuhur, Sherifa. 1992. Revealing Reveiling. New York: State
University of New York Press.
1225
Foster Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11230
Visiting
hour:
Mon to Fri - 2:30 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.
Saturday - 11:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Phone:
(718) 421-1756
Fax: (718) 421- 2497
Mohammad
Yousufuddin ,
MD
|
S A Hannan <sahannan@...>
sahannan@...
 Send Email
|
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
